Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Holy Child Auxilium School

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. No prejudice to re-nominating this after 2 or 3 months. This debate has been marred by irrelevant discussions about possible political ramifications. Randykitty (talk) 14:10, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Holy Child Auxilium School[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Holy Child Auxilium School (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The school doesn't seem to meet WP:GNG. No third party source found. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 16:12, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 16:13, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 16:13, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 16:13, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 16:13, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep for now, due to the ongoing Smriti Irani issue. Submitter should clarify whether the current controversy has anything to do with the nomination (such as, the news articles made the editor aware of the school). Maybe submit the article for deletion again after the current controversy over her education has passed; otherwise people will say we are biased on our politics, or that the deleting was done to help or hurt someone politically. As for sources, there is one well detailed, third party source(here) in the article. Conceivably there could be more.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 18:42, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thank you for getting back quickly on my question. Possibly User:Bhanwar singh vaish became aware of it due to current events.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 19:24, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Epiphyllumlover, he last edited the article in March 2019 and has been banned the same month. I actually followed through from my CSD log and stumbled on the article. So it was pretty much random. --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 20:02, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, it was pretty much random. I checked the edit history and must agree. The reference relating to the political scandal was added 19:37, 6 April 2019 by User:ToMt--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 20:09, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - as an officially recognized secondary school, we should keep this as we do most any secondary school with reliable proof of existence. John from Idegon (talk) 09:42, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    John from Idegon, Well the article doesn't have third party coverage beyond WP:ITEXISTS --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 12:06, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keeping the article helps the politician, removing it hurts the politician. Because the politician was caught falsely inflating her education earlier, she has highlighted her status as an alum of this school (not the same one as in the scandal) in an apparent attempt to showcase her top-notch background and maybe distract from the scandal. Keeping the article raises the status of the school, complementing her recent effort at damage control, deleting it does the opposite.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 18:26, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Epiphyllumlover, how so? The article has no third party source so seriously fail WP:GNG--Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 18:47, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The 19:37, 6 April 2019 by User:ToMt edit on the article added a single third party reference to the school. Granted, it was about Smriti Irani. So I looked on Google News: In 2015, the school was attacked 6 times in possible sectarian violence, leading to enhanced security measures, and also a special, Bollywood-inspired team, although later on the motivation was said to be theft. They caught a perp.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 19:05, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Epiphyllumlover, hmm tricky. But I think those sources should make the article cross WP:GNG. Although it more points towards event happening at the school rather than the school itself. --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 20:24, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note - the current political issues have no bearing whatsoever on whether this article gets kept or deleted. The only question before us here in this discussion is whether or not the subject, this school, meets community standards for an article. Everything else is a content issue and belongs on the article's talk page. John from Idegon (talk) 01:30, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - The above being said, the question is whether the subject meets community standards for an article. I say it does. We've had numerous RfCs over the years trying to delineate a written standard and indeed we do periodically change the written standard. However, it has always been and I'd suggest it will always be the community consensus as illustrated by what happens here at AfD that we keep all legitimate diploma granting secondary schools. Wikipedia operates on consensus not rules. John from Idegon (talk) 01:30, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    John from Idegon, even if the sources about the school are lacking? --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 02:54, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yes, Tyw7. The standard for a diploma granting school is now and always has been much closer to GEOFEAT than GNG. You are clearly not disputing the school's existence. That's more than adequately shown, much better than many school articles. And please remember it isn't the article we are judging, it's the subject. Numerous other sources have been proffered here. The bit about the attack should certainly be added to the article. John from Idegon (talk) 03:29, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
      John from Idegon, Fajr enough. Can someone add the sources in the article --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 10:32, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - does not meet WP:GNG, WP:NSCHOOL or WP:NGO, which states, "Organizations whose activities are local in scope (e.g., a school or club) can be considered notable if there is substantial verifiable evidence of coverage by reliable independent sources outside the organization's local area." - the absence of such coverage = delete - Epinoia (talk) 00:37, 12 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, T. Canens (talk) 03:19, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep -- We normally allow articles for Secondary Schools (which this is). This was to some extent a pragmatic policy as pupils are likely to want to create articles about their own schools. As an English medium school, this is likely to have a higher profile than Hindi-medium schools as its alumni are more likely to get good jobs, as a result of that education. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:30, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Peterkingiron, but there is no reliable coverage of the school. It must at least pass WP:GNG --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 15:39, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as (I know it would be really hard to prove it), but this school is one of the better known ones in the West Delhi area. Delhi has numerous schools (given its population of 22 million), but only a few schools are well known enough (or perceived by parents to provide a good standard of education). For the record, I knew the name of his school as far back in the 90s, much before Wikipedia. When I decide whether to vote keep or delete, I believe that it is important to also consider the age of the school, newspaper reports, as well as whether the school has any famous alumni. The school is close to 50 years old and it has 2 generations of alumni, which can be verified from this report in DailyMail. This is also the sister school of Don Bosco School (Alaknanda, New Delhi), another well known school (verified from [1]). I understand the lack of coverage, but back in the 90s or 2000s, I distinctly remember that the activities hosted by the school (inter-school sports events, extracurricular activities) would appear in the pages of Hindustan Times/Times of India. Unfortunately I don't have access to the archives anymore so I cannot find it. The vandalism incident as well as the Smriti Irani controversy both add to the fact that people could reasonably search Wikipedia for more information about this school, so I guess we can keep this article.--DreamLinker (talk) 03:22, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Are there any sources on this topic?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:12, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment the comment dated 20:24, 8 May 2019 evaluated the sources I mentioned in the 19:05, 8 May 2019 comment as being enough to cross cross WP:GNG.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 04:09, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Holy_Child_Auxilium_School&oldid=899198579"